Background: Intimate partner violence (IPV) is common among women Veterans (WVs), with nearly 20% of WVs treated in Veterans Health Administration (VHA) primary care clinics experiencing past-year IPV. VHA?s Women?s Health Services (WHS), the IPV Assistance Program, and the Offices of Primary Care and Mental Health and Suicide Prevention developed recommendations for implementing IPV screening programs in primary care. More than two-thirds of WV primary care patients receive care in ?Model 1? (i.e., mixed-gender primary care) and ?Model 2? (i.e., separate but shared space) clinics, but uptake of screening is low in these clinics. WHS therefore plans to use Blended Facilitation (BF) to roll out IPV screening programs in Model 1 and Model 2 primary care clinics. Given the high number of these clinics throughout VHA, it is unclear whether resource-intensive BF is feasible and whether a less intensive strategy (i.e., toolkit + Implementation as Usual [IAU]) can be effective. Research is also needed on the clinical effectiveness of IPV screening programs. Significance/Impact: Given the high prevalence of IPV among WVs and its significant health effects, successful implementation of IPV screening programs is expected to improve healthcare services and reduce morbidity among WV VHA patients, an HSR&D priority area. Innovation: This study will be the most comprehensive evaluation of both the implementation impact and clinical effectiveness of IPV screening programs globally. It is innovative in its inclusion of four strong VHA operations partners dedicated to successful implementation of IPV screening programs. This project capitalizes on a time-sensitive opportunity to advance IPV screening programs and implementation science. Specific Aims: This objective of this proposal is to comprehensively evaluate two strategies for implementing IPV screening programs through achieving three specific aims. (1) Evaluate the degree of reach, adoption, implementation fidelity, and maintenance achieved using two implementation strategies for IPV screening programs. (2) Evaluate the clinical effectiveness of IPV screening programs, as evidenced by disclosure rates and post-screening psychosocial service use. (3) Identify multi-level barriers to and facilitators of IPV screening program implementation and sustainment. Methodology: We propose a cluster randomized, stepped wedge, Hybrid Type II program evaluation design to compare the impact of two implementation strategies (BF + toolkit vs. toolkit + IAU) and the clinical effectiveness of IPV screening programs. We propose a mixed methods approach to collect quantitative (clinical records data) and qualitative (key informant interviews) implementation outcomes (Aims 1 and 3), as well as quantitative (clinical records data) clinical effectiveness outcomes (Aim 2). We will supplement these data collection methods with surveys to assess implementation strategies survey to be completed pre-BF, post-BF, and in the maintenance phase. The integrated-Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) framework will guide the qualitative data collection and analysis. Summative data will be analyzed using the Reach Effectiveness Adoption Implementation Maintenance (RE-AIM) Framework. Next Steps/Implementation: Our four VHA operations partners are eager to use our study results to inform future implementation strategies and clinical practices to spread IPV screening programs to all VHA primary care clinics and other clinical settings so that this vital intervention is accessible to all WV VHA patients.